Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 9.djvu/418

 324 THE BATTLE OF ASHDOWN. Mr. Lysons lias also, in some degree, followed Mr. Wise's error ; and this point of distance has been noticed more particularly, inasmuch as the former seems to consider, that his Ashdown (subsequently mentioned) has the advantage in point of situation, though he does not mention the distance of the other from Reading as militating against its claims. If we suppose the Saxons to have contented themselves with chasing the enemy for a few miles only, and that the battle was not decided till a late hour of the day, the remaining distance from their stronghold at Reading would perfectly accord with the time mentioned by Asser, who states that they arrived there at the commencement of the following day. We have therefore in favour of this place, the correspond- ing testimonies of name, local situation, distance, and local monuments. An hypothesis, so decidedly probable, has, of course, been generally admitted ; but it is pleasant to overturn the theory of a preceding writer, and erect another. Accordingly, Mr. Lysons, in the introduction to his account of Berkshire in the Magna Britannia, informs us, that there are strong reasons ^ for supposing that the battle was not fought at the place described, and raises up another Ashdown, or rather the ghost of an Ashdown (for the name is unknown there at present), to contend for the palm. The summary of Mr. Lysons' strong reasons is as follows : "There was a manor in or near^ the parish of Ashampstead, known by the name of Ashdown, and described by the name of Assedone in the Norman Survey, and in several subsequent records, which sufficiently agrees, both in name and situation with the little which is to be gathered from our historians on the subject." In what respect, however, has it any advantage ? Clearly not in name, for the name of Aslidown jiuHa Ashbury can be traced from an early Saxon period to the present day ; and the omission of it in the Norman Survey proves nothing, as it might have been included, being monastic property, under the head of Eissesberie, the principal estate belonging to the Abbey of Glastonbury. Nor is the situation more probable, as it would by no ^ I suspect, though it is not avowed, that Dr. Beeke was the real author of this liypothesis. It much resembles others broached by that gentleman. '■' It was in the parish of Ilampstead Norris.